Church History- Text 1

In his work named “Pelagius and Pelagians”, professor Mathijs Lamberigts analyze the
doctrinaire font of Pelagianism. For the beginning, he sees the letter which are attributed to
Pelagius as a problem, as many of them may be erroneous linked to his person. Some scholars
thinks that “Corpus Pelagianum” is only a matter of debate and some works belongs to other
authors. Also, he argues that a writing of Pelagius is not necessarily a heretical one only because
is written by him. For example, he was a very spiritual person and focused on the ascetic element,
which is clearly not a heresy (we can not consider ascetism as a part of the Pelagian heresy).
Professor Lamberigts explains Pelagiu’s desire to improve the Christians and to develop a a proper
way of living as a Christian believer. He was accused of heresy because of his doctrine about
Adam’s fall, original sin, free will and grace. Pelagius an his adepts were initially set free without
any guilt by a first sinod in 415. In 418 however, because of many pressures, they were condemned
and exiled. Professor thinks that initially, at his doctrine foundation, Pelagius was orthodox. His
main desire was to become an orthodox writer. He distanced himself from heterodox movements
and emphasized with human free will and also he saw the Maniheism as a threat to authentic
Christian life. In his perspective about freedom, Pelagius doesn’t believe that humans could be
sinless. Furthermore, professor Lamberigts expose that Pelagius does not neglect the grace of God,
which is seen as a gift. Doing such an analyze, professor remarks that some of the acusations which
were brought to Pelagius are not founded because he is orthodox in what concerned them in his
preserved writings.
Another individual involved in this Pelagian controversy is Caelestius. He was a disciple
of Pelagius and the leader of the Pelagian movement. He lived an ascetic life and he wanted to
become a priest. Deacon Paulinus of Milan was the one who arose ideas against Caelestius. He
taught in his statement at Carthage that the transmission of sin is still questionable and he did not
believe that the baptism of the infants is necessarily for the remission of an original sin. After he
was set free conditionally under Zosimus, the African community was demanded to prove his
heterodoxy ( professor Lamberigts consider this fact as an evidence that “orthodoxy” was a
subjective concept). Caelestius was finally condemned by Zosimos and exiled. His way of thinking
was similar to Pelagius. Because most of his writings were lost, we do nit have a clear point of
view about his doctrine but was he was hostile regarding the transmission of original sin. Despite
Pelagius, Caelestius focuses specially on the freedom of the human will.
Julian of Aeclanum is also involved in this controversy. He was an exegete but his
exegetical work was not a great part of the controversy and because of this Lamberigts does not
focus on it. He was considered the most intellectual capable opponent of Augustine. He was
inspired by Jerome and maybe Theodore of Mopsuestia. In his biblical approach, he preferred the
historic one. In his opinion, the rational truth are not contradictory. Professor Lamberigts questions
weather or not Julian has an eastern influence in his controversy with Augustine. Julian was the
one who determined Augustine to explain his doctrine. He believed that God is the creator of the
human kind and soul and body are good. In his thinking, God gives to every new born child a new
created soul, a clear position against original sin’s doctrine of Augustine. A transmission of sin
would be a direct responsibility for God and of the position that Gods make everything good. The
Adamic sin had not great repercussions. He also adapts in his thinking scientific insights. All
people are responsible for their sins. Imitiatio Cristi is also present in his doctrine. He was a human
like all of us, having all of our weaknesses. Because of that, He showed us how we can become
and inspired us to take Him as an example. We can find salvation in the Church, were the grace of
God is present. The grace of God and the human free will respect each other in the way that the
divine grace did not abolish the freedom. He rejected the doctrine about the original sin because
in his thinking, every human is judged by God, who is just and everybody takes what he deserves
for his sins or good acts. In this way, Adam’s sin could not be transmitted because his descendants
did not actioned in his place and God would condemn his own work. Julian was a promoter of
infants baptism only because it granted them the heaven but not because of the original sin.
Professor Lamberigts remarks that in this controversy, Julian choose to attack, unlike Pelagius who
defended himself.

Professor consider that Pelagianism as an organized movement did not existed. Pelagius
and pelagians wanted to live a truly Christian life. Also, the idea of original sin and it’s
transmission was not a doctrine until a certain point. Also, Pelagius was admired for his ascetic
way of life. Pelagius and Caelestius condemnation were influenced by African episcopacy and
Augustine’s involvement. Western Christianity had problems with the doctrine about relationship
between grace and free will. Professor Lamberigts also finds interesting the possibility of links
between Pelagian doctrine and eastern theologies. In his approach to Pelagian controversy, Mathijs
Lamberigts uses the historical-critical method with the main aiming of a better understanding of it
and with a desire to reveal the truth as much as possible. In this way, similar to Peter Gemeinhardt
point of view, professor Lamberigts focuses on the providing of a historical insight. Moreover,
Peter Neesen in his statement was clear about the necessity of returning to historical sources, which
are the background of every sentence of professor Lamberigts in “Pelagius and pelagians”. To sum
up, professor Mathijs Lamberigts is aware that the only way of approaching a historical subject is
through a critical method which is based on historical sources and researches.